Outcomes and Complications of Surgery for Symptomatic Spinal Metastases; a Comparison Between Patients Aged ≥ 70 and <70.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Physicians may be deterred from operating on elderly patients due to fears of poorer outcomes and complications. We aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical treatment of spinal metastases patients aged ≥70-yrs and <70-yrs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients surgically treated for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and spinal instability between January-2005 to December-2021. Follow-up was till death or minimum 1-year post-surgery. Outcomes included post-operative neurological status, ambulatory status, medical and surgical complications. Two Sample t-test/Mann Whitney U test were used for numerical variables and Pearson Chi-Squared or Fishers Exact test for categorical variables. Survival was presented with a Kaplan-Meier curve. P < .05 was significant. RESULTS: We identified 412 patients of which 29 (7.1%) patients were excluded due to loss to follow-up and previous surgical treatment. 79 (20.6%) were ≥70-yrs. Age ≥70-yrs patients had poorer ECOG scores (P = .0017) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (P < .001). No significant difference in modified Tokuhashi score (P = .393) was observed with significantly more ≥ prostate (P < .001) and liver (P = .029) cancer in ≥70-yrs. Improved or maintained normal neurological function (P = .934), independent ambulatory status (P = .171), and survival at 6 months (P = .119) and 12 months (P = .659) was not significantly different between both groups. Medical (P = .528) or surgical (P = .466) complication rates and readmission rates (P = .800) were similar. CONCLUSION: ≥70-yrs patients have comparable outcomes to <70-yr old patients with no significant increase in complication rates. Age should not be a determining factor in deciding surgical management of spinal metastases.

The lateral entry point S2 alar-iliac (L-S2AI) screw: a preoperative computed tomography analysis of adult spinal deformity patients.

PURPOSE: To radiographically compare lateral entry point S2-alar-iliac (L-S2AI) screw with conventional S2AI (C-S2AI) and conventional iliac screw (CIS) lengths and trajectories. METHODS: Twenty-five preoperative CT scans of consecutive patients undergoing adult spinal deformity realignment surgery over a random 2-year period were analysed. Maximum in-bone length, caudal and lateral trajectories of CIS, C-S2AI, and L-S2AI screws were measured and compared using One-way ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc tests. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of high screw length discrepancy between C-S2AI and L-S2AI. RESULTS: Potential screw length was longest for CIS, followed by L-S2AI, then C-S2AI (114.5 ± 8.3 mm vs 101.4 ± 9.6 mm vs 80.6 ± 5.9 mm, respectively) in all patients (p < 0.001). Actual screw lengths found both CIS and L-S2AI to be longer than C-S2AI (95.3 ± 8.5 mm and 93.4 ± 7.5 mm vs 82.1 ± 7.3 mm; p = 0.008 and 0.003). Potential lateral angulation was smallest for CIS, followed by L-S2AI, then C-S2AI (21.9 ± 7.0° vs 31.9 ± 7.1° vs 40.9 ± 6.7°, respectively) in all patients (p < 0.001). L-S2AI and C-S2AI had the same caudal angulation (24.9 ± 6.8°), which was smaller than CIS (30.8 ± 5.8°) in all patients (p < 0.001). Univariate, but not multivariate analysis, revealed that lumbar lordosis > 40° (OR 7.2, p = 0.041), diagnosis of degenerative spondylolisthesis (OR 10.5, p = 0.017), and > 7 instrumented levels (OR 2.6, p = 0.049) were significantly associated with high screw discrepancies. CONCLUSION: The L-S2AI screw combines advantages of CIS and C-S2AI screws, which includes increased screw length, reduced lateral angulation, a low-profile screw head, ease of connection to proximal hardware, and the biomechanical advantage of a quadcortical purchase.

Factors affecting curve flexibility in skeletally immature and mature idiopathic scoliosis.

BACKGROUND: The determination of factors affecting curve flexibility is important in idiopathic scoliosis patients with regard to the Risser sign. The objective of this retrospective study was to identify factors affecting curve flexibility in patients with skeletally immature and mature idiopathic scoliosis. METHODS: The records of all patients with idiopathic scoliosis who received surgical treatment from July 2001 to August 2008 at our hospital were screened. The Risser sign was used to separate the patients into a skeletally mature group (Risser grade = 5) and skeletally immature group (Risser grade < 5). Data recorded and compared were flexibility (%), bending angle (°), apical vertebral rotation (°), Cobb angle (°), curve location, prior use of brace treatment, and number of vertebrae in the curve. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 217 patients (34 males, 183 females) in the Risser grade < 5 group and 124 (21 males, 103 females) in the Risser grade = 5 group. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that the Cobb angle and the curve location significantly affected curve flexibility in the Risser grade < 5 group, whereas in the Risser grade = 5 group, Cobb angle and age significantly affected flexibility. CONCLUSIONS: Cobb angle and curve location influence main curve flexibility in skeletally immature adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, and Cobb angle and age influence curve flexibility in skeletally mature adult scoliosis. Measurement of these values may aid in the evaluation of treatment options and preoperative planning.

Making a Traditional Spine Surgery Clinic Telemedicine-Ready in the "New Normal" of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

STUDY DESIGN: An original article describing a comprehensive methodology for making a traditional spine surgery clinic telemedicineready in terms of logistical considerations and workflow. PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to promote the use of telemedicine via videoconferencing to reduce human exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and reduce the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission at outpatient clinics. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The COVID-19 pandemic is the biggest healthcare crisis in the 21st century. Until a vaccine is developed or herd immunity against SARS-CoV-2 is achieved, social distancing to avoid crowding is an important strategy to reduce disease transmission and resurgence. Telemedicine has already been applied in the field of orthopedics with encouraging results. METHODS: We reviewed the evidence behind telemedicine and described our clinical protocol, patient selection criteria, and workflow for telemedicine. We discussed a simple methodology to convert pre-existing traditional clinic resources into telemedicine tools, along with future challenges. RESULTS: Our methodology was successfully and easily applied in our clinical practice, with a streamlined workflow allowing our spine surgery service to implement telemedicine as a consultation modality in line with the national recommendations of social distancing. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine was well incorporated into our outpatient practice using the above workflow. We believe that the use of telemedicine via videoconferencing can become part of the new normal and a safe strategy for healthcare systems as both a medical and an economic countermeasure against COVID-19.

Fulcrum to Generate Maximum Extension of the Spine and Hip-Proposing A New Strategy using EOS Imaging for Patient-specific Assessment of Degenerated Lumbar Spines.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective, radiographic comparative study conducted in a single academic institution. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare fulcrum extension with conventional extension imaging to determine maximum "hip lordosis" (HL), an important novel patient-specific parameter in spinal realignment surgery, as well as understand the extension capabilities of the lower lumbar spine, which together, are key contributors to whole-body balancing. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Recent literature recognizes the hip as an important contributor to whole-body lordosis beyond a compensator for spinal imbalance. METHODS: Patients >45 years' old with mechanical low back pain due to degenerative spinal conditions were included and grouped based on the imaging performed-fulcrum or conventional extension. All imaging was performed using EOS under standardized instructions and visual aids. Radiographic parameters include global lumbar angle (GLA), inflexion-S1 (Inf-S1) angle, segmental lumbar angles, pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), femoral alignment angle (FAA), HL and spinocoxa angle (SCA). Unpaired t test was used to compare between radiographic parameters. RESULTS: One hundred patients (40 males and 60 females, mean age 63.0 years) underwent either fulcrum or conventional extension EOS® imaging. Both groups had comparable baseline radiographic parameters. Fulcrum extension gave a larger mean GLA (-60.7° vs. -48.5°, P = 0.001), Inf-S1 angle (-58.8° vs. -48.8°, P = 0.003), SCA (-36.5° vs. -24.8°, P < 0.001), L4/5 and L5/S1 lordosis (-20.7° vs. -17.7°, P = 0.041, and -22.3° vs. -17.1°, P = 0.018, respectively), compared to conventional extension. PI, SS, PT, FAA, and HL were similar between both extension postures. CONCLUSION: Fulcrum extension, compared to conventional extension, is better at generating lordosis in the lower lumbar spine, thus improving preoperative assessment of stiffness or instability of the lumbar spine. Both extension methods were equally effective at determining the patient-specific maximum HL to assess the flexibility and compensation occurring at the hip, potentially guiding surgical management of patients with degenerative spines.Level of Evidence: 3.

Using spinopelvic parameters to estimate residual lumbar lordosis assuming previous lumbosacral fusion-a study of normative values.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Pelvic incidence (PI)=pelvic tilt (PT)+sacral slope (SS) is an established trigonometric equation which can be expanded from studying the fixed pelvis with the spine to a fixed spinopelvic complex with the remnant spine, in scenarios of spinopelvic fusion or ankylosis. For a fixed spinopelvic complex, we propose the equation termed: lumbar incidence (LI)=lumbar tilt (LT)+lumbar slope (LS). PURPOSE: This study aimed to establish reference values for LI, LT, and LS at each lumbar vertebral level, and to show how LI can be used to determine residual lumbar lordosis (rLL). STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study of prospectively collected data, conducted at a single academic tertiary health-care center. PATIENT SAMPLE: The study included 53 healthy patients aged 19-35 with first episode mechanical low back pain for a period of <3 months. Patients with previous spinal intervention, those with known or suspected spinal pathologies, and those who were pregnant, were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: Radiological measurements of LI, LT, LS, and rLL. METHODS: All patients had full-body lateral standing radiographs obtained via a slot scanner. Basic global and regional radiographic parameters, spinopelvic parameters, and the aforementioned new parameters were measured. LI was correlated with rLL at each level by plotting LI against rLL on scatter plots and drawing lines-of-best-fit through the datapoints. RESULTS: The mean value of L5I was 22.82°, L4I was 6.52°, L3I was -0.92°, L2I was -5.56°, and L1I was -5.95°. LI turns negative at L3, LS turns negative at the L3/L4 apex, and LT remains positive throughout the lumbar spine. We found that the relationship of LI with its corresponding rLL follows a parabolic trend. Thus, rLL can be determined from the linear equations of the tangents to the parabolic lumbar spine. We propose the LI-rLL method for determining rLL as the LI recalibrates via spinopelvic compensation post instrumentation, and thus the predicted rLL will be based on this new equilibrium, promoting restoration of harmonized lordosis. The rLL-to-LI ratio is a simplified, but less accurate, method of deriving rLL from LI. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the extended use of PI=PT+SS proposed as LI=LT+LS. These new spinopelvic reference values help us better understand the position of each vertebra relative to the hip. In situations when lumbar vertebrae are fused or ankylosed to the sacrum to form a single spinopelvic complex, LI can be used to determine rLL, to preserve spinal harmony within the limits of compensated body balance.

The Predictive Value of Preoperative Health-Related Quality-of-Life Scores on Postoperative Patient-Reported Outcome Scores in Lumbar Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: A single-center, retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To predict patient-reported outcomes (PROs) using preoperative health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) scores by quantifying the correlation between them, so as to aid selection of surgical candidates and preoperative counselling. METHODS: All patients who underwent single-level elective lumbar spine surgery over a 2-year period were divided into 3 diagnosis groups: spondylolisthesis, spinal stenosis, and disc herniation. Patient characteristics and health scores (Oswestry Low Back Pain and Disability Index [ODI], EQ-5D, and Short Form-36 version 2 [SF-36v2]) were collected at 6 and 24 months and compared between the 3 diagnosis groups. Multivariate modelling was performed to investigate the predictive value of each parameter, particularly preoperative ODI and EQ-5D, on postoperative ODI and EQ-5D scores for all the patients. RESULTS: ODI and EQ-5D at 6 and 24 months improved significantly for all patients, especially in the disc herniation group, compared to the baseline. The magnitude of improvement in ODI and EQ-5D was predictable using preoperative ODI, EQ-5D, and SF-36v2 Mental Component Score. At 6 months, 1-point baseline ODI predicts for 0.7-point increase in changed ODI, and a 0.01-point increase in baseline EQ-5D predicts for 0.01-point decrease in changed EQ-5D score. At 24 months, 1-point baseline ODI predicts for 1-point increase in changed ODI, and a 0.01-point increase in baseline EQ-5D predicts for 0.009-point decrease in changed EQ-5D. A younger age is shown to be a positive predictor of ODI at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Poorer baseline health scores predict greater improvement in postoperative PROs at 6 and 24 months after the surgery. HRQoL scores can be used to decide on surgery and in preoperative counselling.

Is Intraoperative Local Vancomycin Powder the Answer to Surgical Site Infections in Spine Surgery?

STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort comparative study of all patients who underwent instrumented spine surgery at a single institution. OBJECTIVE: To compare the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) between the treatment (vancomycin) and the control group (no vancomycin) in patients undergoing instrumented spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: SSI after spine surgery is a dreaded complication associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Prophylactic intraoperative local vancomycin powder to the wound has been recently adopted as a strategy to reduce SSI but results have been variable. METHODS: In the present study, there were 117 (30%) patients in the treatment group and 272 (70%) patients in the comparison cohort. All patients received identical standard operative and postoperative care procedures based on protocolized department guidelines. The present study compared the rate of SSI with and without the use of prophylactic intraoperative local vancomycin powder in patients undergoing various instrumented spine surgery, adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: The overall rate of SSI was 4.7% with a decrease in infection rate found in the treatment group (0.9% vs. 6.3%). This was statistically significant (P = 0.049) with an odds ratio of 0.13 (95% confidence interval 0.02-0.99). The treatment group had a significantly shorter onset of infection (5 vs. 16.7 days; P < 0.001) and shorter duration of infection (8.5 vs. 26.8 days; P < 0.001). The most common causative organism was Pseudomonas aeruginosa (35.2%). Patient diagnosis, surgical approach, and intraoperative blood loss were significant risk factors for SSI after multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic Intraoperative local vancomycin powder reduces the risk and morbidity of SSI in patients undergoing instrumented spine surgery. P. aeruginosa infection is common in the treatment arm. Future prospective randomized controlled trials in larger populations involving other spine surgeries with a long-term follow-up duration are recommended. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Reproducibility of sagittal radiographic parameters in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis-a guide to reference values using serial imaging.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Knowledge of sagittal radiographic parameters in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients has not yet caught up with our understanding of their roles in patients with adult spinal deformity. It is likely that more emphasis will be placed in restoring sagittal parameters for AIS patients in the future. Therefore, we need to understand how these parameters may vary in AIS to facilitate management plans. PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the reproducibility of sagittal spinal parameters on lateral film radiographs in patients with AIS. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This was a retrospective, comparative study conducted in a tertiary health-care institution from January 2013 to February 2016 (3-year period). PATIENT SAMPLE: All AIS patients who underwent deformity correction surgery from January 2013 to February 2016 and had two preoperative serial lateral radiographs taken within the time period of a month were included in the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Radiographic sagittal spinal parameters including sagittal vertical axis (SVA), cervical lordosis (CL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), thoracolumbar alignment (TL), lumbar lordosis (LL); standard spinopelvic measurements such as pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS); as well as end and apical vertebrae of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar curves were the outcome measures. METHODS: All patient data were pooled from electronic medical records, and X-ray images were retrieved from Centricity Enterprise Web. Averaged X-ray measurements by two independent assessors were analyzed by comparing two radiographs of the same patients performed within a 1-month time period. Chi-squared and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used for categorical and continuous variables. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 138 patients, 28 men and 110 women, with a mean age of 15 years (range 11-20). Between the two lateral X-rays, there was a mean difference of 0.79 cm in SVA (p<.001), 0.70° in LL (p=.033), and 0.73° in PT (p=.010). In the combined Lenke 1 and 2 subgroup, there was a similar 0.77 cm (p=.002), 0.79° (p=.009), and 1.49° (p=.001) mean difference in SVA, LL, and PT, respectively. Additionally, there was also a 1.85° (p=.009) and 1.76° (p=.006) mean difference seen in TL and SS, respectively. The overall profile of the sagittal curves remained largely similar, with only the lumbar apex shifting from L3 to L4 during the first and the second X-rays, respectively (p<.001). This occurred for the combined Lenke 1 and 2 subgroup as well (p<.001). CONCLUSION: Most radiographic sagittal spinal parameters in AIS patients are generally reproducible with some variations up to a maximum of 4°. This natural variation should be taken into account when interpreting these radiographic sagittal parameters so as to achieve the most accurate results in surgical planning.

How are patients influenced when counseled for minimally invasive lumbar spine surgeries? A stepwise model assessing pivotal information for decision-making.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS)-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has many evidence-based short-term benefits over open TLIF, both procedures have similar long-term outcomes. Patients' preference for MIS over open TLIF may be confounded by a lack of understanding of what each approach entails. PURPOSE: The study aimed to identify the various factors influencing patients' choice between MIS and open TLIF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This is a cross-sectional study conducted at a tertiary health-care institution. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients, for whom TLIF procedures were indicated, were recruited over a 3-month period from specialist outpatient clinics. OUTCOME MEASURE: The outcome measure was patients' choice of surgical approach (MIS or open). METHODS: All patients were subjected to a stepwise interviewing process and were asked to select between open and MIS approaches at each step. Further subgroup analysis stratifying subjects based on stages of decision-making was performed to identify key predictors of selection changes. No sources of funding were required for this study and there are no conflicts of interests. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients with a mean age of 55.8 years participated in the study. Thirteen (24.1%) consistently selected a single approach, whereas 31 (57.4%) changed their selection more than once during the interviewing process. Overall, 12 patients (22.2%) had a final decision different from their initial choice, and 15 patients (27.8%) were unable to decide. A large proportion of patients (65.0%) initially favored the open approach's midline incision. This proportion dropped to 16.7% (p<.001) upon mention of the term MIS. The proportion of patients favoring MIS dropped significantly following discussion on the pros and cons (p=.002) of each approach, as well as conversion or revision surgery (p=.017). Radiation and cosmesis were identified as the two most important factors influencing patients' final decisions. CONCLUSIONS: The longer midline incision of the open approach is cosmetically more appealing to patients than the paramedian stab wounds of MIS. The advantages of the MIS approach may not be as valued by patients as they are by surgeons. Given the equivalent long-term outcomes of both approaches, it is crucial that patients are adequately informed during preoperative counseling to achieve the best consensus decision.

Prevalence and Predictors of Pressure Injuries From Spine Surgery in the Prone Position: Do Body Morphological Changes During Deformity Correction Increase the Risks?

MINI: Pressure injuries are prevalent in patients undergoing spine surgery while prone. Multiple risk factors exist and should be addressed. We found that patients undergoing spinal deformity correction surgery are at unique risk (odds ratio 3.31, P = 0.010) due to body morphological changes occurring secondary to intraoperative changes in spinal alignment. STUDY DESIGN: Review of data and prospective study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and predictive factors of pressure injuries in spine surgery performed in the prone position, and to determine whether morphological changes and truncal shifts occurring during deformity correction predispose to this complication. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spine surgery performed in the prone position presents the risk of developing pressure injuries. This risk is potentially increased in deformity correction, because it tends to involve more extensive procedures, with associated longer operating times. METHODS: Cases of pressure injuries after spine surgery in the prone position were reviewed to ascertain prevalence and determine risk factors. Data including patient factors (age, sex, height, weight, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, comorbidities, Braden scale, neurological status, spinal pathology) and surgical factors (approach, procedure type, number of screws, operated levels, operative time) were collected. Independent risk factors were identified via multivariate analysis. A subsequent prospective analysis of all patients undergoing spinal deformity correction was conducted by performing intraoperative measurements of body morphological changes and shifts in truncal positions. Statistical correlation was performed to determine whether positional shifts cause pressure injuries. RESULTS: The prevalence of pressure injuries was 23.0%. Previous skin problems (P = 0.034), myelopathy (P = 0.013), operative time >300 minutes (P = 0.005), and more than four operated levels (P = 0.006) were independent predictors of pressure injuries. Being a spinal deformity patient was also an independent risk factor for developing pressure injuries (odds ratio 3.31, P = 0.010). Significant changes in body measurements during deformity correction were predictive of pressure injuries. CONCLUSION: Pressure injuries are prevalent in patients undergoing spine surgery while prone. Future studies should investigate strategies to prevent this complication based on the multiple risk factors identified in the present study. Patients undergoing spinal deformity correction surgery are particularly at risk due to intraoperative body morphological changes. Improved padding methods should be trialed in future studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

How the spine differs in standing and in sitting-important considerations for correction of spinal deformity.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The current prevailing school of thought in spinal deformity surgery is to restore sagittal balance with reference to the alignment of the spine when the patient is standing. This strategy, however, likely accounts for increased rates of proximal junctional failure. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences between the spine in standing and sitting positions as these may elucidate reasons for deformity correction failure. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A prospective, comparative study of 58 healthy patients presenting to a tertiary hospital over a 6-month period was carried out. PATIENT SAMPLE: All patients presenting with a less than 3-month history of first episode lower back pain were included. Patients who had radicular symptoms, red flag symptoms, previous spine surgery, or visible spinal deformity during forward bending test were excluded. Pregnant patients were also excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: Radiographic measurements including sagittal vertical axis (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracolumbar angle (TL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), cervical lordosis (CL), pelvic incidence (PI), and pelvic tilt (PT) were collected. The sagittal apex and end vertebrae of all radiographs were also recorded. METHODS: Basic demographic data (age, gender, and ethnicity) was recorded. Lateral standing and sitting radiographs were obtained using EOS technology. Statistical analysis was performed to compare standing and sitting parameters using chi-square tests for categorical variables and paired t tests for continuous variables. RESULTS: Taking the standing position as the reference point, forward displacement of the SVA occurred during sitting by a mean of 6.39±3.87 cm (p<.001). This was accompanied by a reduction of LL and TK by a mean of 24.63±12.70° (p<.001) and 8.56±7.21°(p<.001), respectively. The TL became more lordotic by a mean of 3.25±7.30° (p<.001). The CL only reached borderline significance (p=.047) for increased lordosis by a mean of 3.45±12.92°. The PT also increased by 50% (p<.001). Despite relatively constant end vertebrae, the apex vertebra moved inferiorly for the thoracic curve (p<.006) and superiorly for the lumbar curve (p<.001) by approximately one vertebral level each. CONCLUSIONS: Sagittal spinal alignment changes significantly between standing and sitting positions. Understanding these differences is crucial to avoid overcorrection of LL, which may occur if deformity correction is based solely on the spine's standing sagittal profile.

Differences in erect sitting and natural sitting spinal alignment-insights into a new paradigm and implications in deformity correction.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Sitting spinal alignment is increasingly recognized as a factor influencing strategy for deformity correction. Considering that most individuals sit for longer hours in a "slumped" rather than in an erect posture, greater understanding of the natural sitting posture is warranted. PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the differences in sagittal spinal alignment between two common sitting postures: a natural, patient-preferred posture; and an erect, investigator-controlled posture that is commonly used in alignment studies. DESIGN/SETTING: This is a randomized, prospective study of 28 young, healthy patients seen in a tertiary hospital over a 6-month period. PATIENT SAMPLE: Twenty-eight patients (24 men, 4 women), with a mean age of 24 years (range 19-38), were recruited for this study. All patients with first episode of lower back pain of less than 3 months' duration were included. The exclusion criteria consisted of previous spinal surgery, radicular symptoms, red flag symptoms, previous spinal trauma, obvious spinal deformity on forward bending test, significant personal or family history of malignancy, and current pregnancy. OUTCOME MEASURES: Radiographic measurements included sagittal vertical axis (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracolumbar angle (TL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), and cervical lordosis (CL). Standard spinopelvic parameters (pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt [PT], and sacral slope) and sagittal apex and end vertebrae were also measured. METHODS: Basic patient demographics (age, gender, ethnicity) were recorded. Lateral sitting whole spine radiographs were obtained using a slot scanner in the imposed erect and the natural sitting posture. Statistical analyses of the radiographical parameters were performed comparing the two sitting postures using chi-squared tests for categorical variables and paired t tests for continuous variables. RESULTS: There was forward SVA shift between the two sitting postures by a mean of 2.9 cm (p<.001). There was a significant increase in CL by a mean of 11.62° (p<.001), and TL kyphosis by a mean of 11.48° (p<.001), as well as a loss of LL by a mean of 21.26° (p<.001). The mean PT increased by 17.68° (p<.001). The entire thoracic and lumbar spine has the tendency to form a single C-shaped curve with the apex moving to L1 (p=.002) vertebra in the majority of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In a natural sitting posture, the lumbar spine becomes kyphotic and contributes to a single C-shaped sagittal profile comprising the thoracic and the lumbar spine. This is associated with an increase in CL and PT, as well as a constant SVA. These findings lend insight into the body's natural way of energy conservation using the posterior ligamentous tension band while achieving sitting spinal sagittal balance. It also provides information on one of the possible causes of proximal junctional kyphosis or proximal junctional failure.

Spinal Implants Can Be Inserted in Patients With Deep Spine Infection: Results From a Large Cohort Study.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective, cohort study of 84 patients with deep spine infection managed at a major tertiary hospital over 14 years with a minimum follow up of 2 years. OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of instrumentation in spines with deep infection. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: It is often believed that implants should not be inserted in patients with deep spine infection because of the risk of persistent or recurrent infection. However, there are often concerns about spinal stability and a paucity of evidence to guide clinical practice in this field. METHODS: We compared the mortality, reoperation, and reinfection rates in patients with spine infection treated with antibiotics alone, antibiotics with debridement, and antibiotics with debridement and instrumentation. Significant outcome predictors were determined using multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: Forty-nine males and 35 females with a mean age was 62.0 years had spine infection affecting the lumbar spine predominantly. The most common form of infection was osteomyelitis and spondylodiscitis (69.4%). Staphylococcus aureus was the most common causative organism (61.2%).There was no difference in terms of reoperation or relapse for patients treated with antibiotics alone, antibiotics with debridement, or antibiotics with debridement and instrumentation. However, compared with antibiotics alone, the crude inhospital mortality was lower for patients treated with instrumentation (odds ratio, OR, 0.82; P = 0.01), and antibiotics with debridement (OR 0.80; P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Spinal instrumentation in an infected spine is safe and not associated with higher reoperation or relapse rates. Mortality is lower for patients treated with instrumentation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

A rare case of multiregional spinal stenosis: clinical description, surgical complication, and management concept review.

Study Design Case report and literature review. Objective Multiregional spinal stenosis (MRSS) has not been described in the English literature, although a few studies report the concept of tandem spinal stenosis. Due to the concurrent spinal stenosis occurring in three separate regions of the spine, clinical presentation of MRSS may be less distinct, and its surgical treatment priorities and challenges differ from single-region spinal stenosis. The purpose of this article is to describe a new concept and a rare case of MRSS as separated segments of spinal stenosis in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine. Methods A retrospective case description of MRSS and surgical strategies used in managing such extensive multiregional stenosis and its potential complications. Results A novel surgical strategy using a combination of laminectomies with fusion and laminoplasty without fusion to treat this patient with such extensive cervical to thoracic myelopathic cord compression is described. Initial good recovery after cervical cord decompression was followed by a delayed recurrence of symptoms from thoracic cord compression. The subsequent thoracic surgical decompression, its complications and management, and patient recovery are discussed with a literature review highlighting the possible mechanisms for postoperative loss of neurologic function after thoracic decompression. Conclusion MRSS is a rare cause of extensive compression of multiple regions of the spinal cord. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this report is the first to use the term multiregional spinal stenosis to describe this new emergent clinical entity, surgical management strategies, and potential complications.

Learning curve of computer-assisted navigation system in spine surgery.

BACKGROUND: Spine surgery using computer-assisted navigation (CAN) has been proven to result in low screw misplacement rates, low incidence of radiation exposure and excellent operative field viewing versus the conventional intraoperative image intensifier (CIII). However, as we know, few previous studies have described the learning curve of CAN in spine surgery. METHODS: We performed two consecutive case cohort studies on pedicel screw accuracy and operative time of two spine surgeons with different experience backgrounds, A and B, in one institution during the same period. Lumbar pedicel screw cortical perforation rate and operative time of the same kind of operation using CAN were analyzed and compared using CIII for the two surgeons at initial, 6 months and 12 months of CAN usage. RESULTS: CAN spine surgery had an overall lower cortical perforation rate and less mean operative time compared with CIII for both surgeon A and B cohorts when total cases of four years were included. It missed being statistically significant, with 3.3% versus 4.7% (P = 0.191) and 125.7 versus 132.3 minutes (P = 0.428) for surgeon A and 3.6% versus 6.4% (P = 0.058), and 183.2 versus 213.2 minutes (P = 0.070) for surgeon B. In an attempt to demonstrate the learning curve, the cases after 6 months of the CAN system in each surgeon's cohort were compared. The perforation rate decreased by 2.4% (P = 0.039) and 4.3% (P = 0.003) and the operative time was reduced by 31.8 minutes (P = 0.002) and 14.4 minutes (P = 0.026) for the CAN groups of surgeons A and B, respectively. When only the cases performed after 12 months using the CAN system were considered, the perforation rate decreased by 3.9% (P = 0.006) and 5.6% (P < 0.001) and the operative time was reduced by 20.9 minutes (P < 0.001) and 40.3 minutes (P < 0.001) for the CAN groups of surgeon A and B, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the long run, CAN spine surgery decreased the lumbar screw cortical perforation rate and operative time. The learning curve showed a sharp drop after 6 months of using CAN that plateaued after 12 months; which was demonstrated by both perforation rate and operative time data. Careful analysis of the data showed CAN is especially useful for less experienced surgeon to reduce perforation rate and intraoperative time, although further comparative studies are anticipated.